SilliamWhale
Member
I don't know of any pies which have RT on them? I think the fresh meat has it on them
Now we are out we should completely reform food labeling laws here to work as a "typical man/woman in the street" would expect.how would you prove otherwise ? used to have labels produce of EEC but where from exactly ?
there is nothing morally wrong with an animal becoming assured after 8 weeks on an assured farm
morality don't come in to it, just rules
please leave non RT store sellers alone with our morals we are quite happy with the rules and our morals as they are thank you very much and so are most of those that buy the animals from us.
so, what does happen to the surplus?I submitted several questions prior to the recent RT webinar. Some were answered during the webinar, and others were answered in an email to me, displayed below. The answers relating to imported foods seem very clear, but perhaps not what others on here believe?View attachment 945536
The magic of red tractor where non assured magically become assured! But rules are rules I guess
@Bald Rick bought some cows from foreign land and I am guessing their milk became RT as soon as their feet hit Welsh soil.
Maybe after a week or so yes but not straight away?Yes but if you think about it, their milk is produced from certified or RT checked sources so it makes sense that it would be classed as RT milk
Maybe after a week or so yes but not straight away?
You may have bought in calf or dry cows in which case its different.
IIRC
Its 3 months under organic feeding and 6 months vet med rules before they produce organic milk.
That to me is acceptableWe buy in calf heifers so they calve down after 6-8 weeks
Is it a reasonable advertising representation to put RT logo on joint of beef, when may have only been on a RT farm for 90 of its 900 day life?
Edit. I've had a few livestock boys who've quite rightly got upset at this post. And I quite agree with them, and realise why they're upset.
I'll leave the top paragraph of this post intact, so replies to it in the thread still make sence. But apologise for any offence caused.
To be fair to me, I think a consumer might not be happy if they knew the truth, so I do stand behind the premise of the question, but realise we're on an ag forum, many guys on here want to reduce the burden of RT on their business and don't want to give RT any more reason for extra daft rules. Hope apology is accepted by my livestock friends on here.
Suppose I've also been guilty of straying off the thread topic.
you're not wrong @Raider112
six years ago rt were presenting wla as a done deal with consultation only on it's implementation....george useless was telling mp sub com. that wla was done
i was watching videos of west country farmers at meetings standing up and saying NO......i was writing letters and lobbying whilst my dad was dieing and i don't even keep cattle...... because i realised that if they won that their aim of complete vertical integration would be a huge step closer
i left rt a year later and the last 5 years have been the hardest mentally/financially/physically of my entire life.....but i'm thru it
i realise this may be a forum ending post for me but where the feck where you then @Grass And Grain?
i was in accs for 17 years without a single non conformance but i fought it every single year......so i'm afraid i find it rather offensive when FINALLY some 'combine jockeys' turn up ... decide they've 'had enough' and start 'throwing stones' at other sectors
you lot have got to grow some balls and tell rt that without wholescale reform you're off and mean it...otherwise nuckle under
I submitted several questions prior to the recent RT webinar. Some were answered during the webinar, and others were answered in an email to me, displayed below. The answers relating to imported foods seem very clear, but perhaps not what others on here believe?View attachment 945536
I expect you're probably right. RT won't roll over will they, otherwise they'll lose income from 17,000 cereal farmers. That's about £450,000/annum in farmer royalties.you lot have learnt nothing and are no further forward than a month ago
RT and NFU are masters of bluff/bluster....they'll argue til your more exhausted than they.....they know the longer it goes on the better they like it
do you honestly think that RT are miraculously gonna suddenly say 'oh yeah you're right ...we'll pack up right now'?
fudging round with AHDB is all very well but they sound nice guys and RT'll pee up their backs all day long IMO
where was the harm in asking the CFA to investigate AIC over the fact imports don't need assurance but domestic does?...if CMA comes back exonerating AIC then you've lost nowt?...you've given AIC time to try and smokescreen any wrong doing (if there is any)
TBH i think you've lost...you can't play by 'queensbury rules' agin a 'cage fighting' RT....they have no honour and don't care IMO
i'm out
We don't really need RT to choose to pack up. What we need is the processors and retails to recognise that insisting on a different set of standards for imported product over domestic product is anti-competitive and illegal. If self-certification on arrival is good enough for their imported materials then the same acceptance of self certification must be acceptable for domestic produce. RT can carry on for those few in the food chain who wish to produce, process and retail 100% RT produce if they wish.you lot have learnt nothing and are no further forward than a month ago
RT and NFU are masters of bluff/bluster....they'll argue til your more exhausted than they.....they know the longer it goes on the better they like it
do you honestly think that RT are miraculously gonna suddenly say 'oh yeah you're right ...we'll pack up right now'?
fudging round with AHDB is all very well but they sound nice guys and RT'll pee up their backs all day long IMO
where was the harm in asking the CFA to investigate AIC over the fact imports don't need assurance but domestic does?...if CMA comes back exonerating AIC then you've lost nowt?...you've given AIC time to try and smokescreen any wrong doing (if there is any)
TBH i think you've lost...you can't play by 'queensbury rules' agin a 'cage fighting' RT....they have no honour and don't care IMO
i'm out
absolutely, being RT after 6 or 8 weeks is perfectly acceptableThat to me is acceptable
The milk can be not the meat.absolutely, being RT after 6 or 8 weeks is perfectly acceptable
non assured cattle can be RT in 8 weeks and as you say perfectly acceptableThe milk can be not the meat.
I said the milk was NOT the meat.non assured cattle can be RT in 8 weeks and as you say perfectly acceptable
feck offI said the milk was NOT the meat.
WLA is the only way IMHO that meat should be RT
your just one of those miserable sods that think that cos you have to have inspections then every bugger should, selfish buggerI said the milk was NOT the meat.
WLA is the only way IMHO that meat should be RT
Pityyou lot have learnt nothing and are no further forward than a month ago
RT and NFU are masters of bluff/bluster....they'll argue til your more exhausted than they.....they know the longer it goes on the better they like it
do you honestly think that RT are miraculously gonna suddenly say 'oh yeah you're right ...we'll pack up right now'?
fudging round with AHDB is all very well but they sound nice guys and RT'll pee up their backs all day long IMO
where was the harm in asking the CFA to investigate AIC over the fact imports don't need assurance but domestic does?...if CMA comes back exonerating AIC then you've lost nowt?...you've given AIC time to try and smokescreen any wrong doing (if there is any)
TBH i think you've lost...you can't play by 'queensbury rules' agin a 'cage fighting' RT....they have no honour and don't care IMO
i'm out